Wayne Stollings wrote:
The previous measurements do not match up with the "higher resolution and better quality measurements" either, thus the drop.
If the data is so much "higher resolution and better qualtiy measurements" why is the slope so similar and yet have a drop that has to have a manipulation in order to overcome?
The measurements by ERBE/ERBS do not agree with the better measurements by NIMBUS7 and ERB during the ACRIM gap, hence the difference in the ACRIM, IRMB and PMOD datasets during the ACRIM Gap, because PMOD uses ERBE data and ACRIM uses NIMBUS 7/ERB data.
There is no "manipulation."
There IS a manipulation in the ACRIM dataset, which is based around a model to merge the ACRIM I and II.
The gap is NOT the issue, but the abnrmally higher ACRIM I before the gap and abnormally lower ACRIM II data after the gap.
You mean the same flat line as the ACRIM? You do know what a slope indicates right?
Compare the two slopes and you see very similar "flat lines".
TSI increased SUBSTANTIALLY between the minima of SC 21 and 22 on ACRIM, which could explain most of the warming over the last 30 years if ACRIM is right. Then TSI decreased and we stopped warming, so comparing the differences between SC 21 and 22 is better for Solar Attributation than SC 21-23, because the temperatures did not rise during the timeframe beyond SC 21-22.
If you look at the graphs the ACRIM is the ONLY composite showing that increase, which makes it less supported than you claim.